University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Theology. Dept. of Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology.

dc.date.accessioned

2011-10-04T10:37:24Z

dc.date.available

2011-10-04T10:37:24Z

dc.date.issued

2011-10

dc.identifier.uri

http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/16522

dc.description

Thesis (D. Th.)--University of Stellenbosch, 2005.

en_ZA

dc.description.abstract

ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Christian confessions are frequently seen as Christian documents that have
nothing to do with the subject of politics. This study endeavours to investigate
the relationship between Christian confessions and politics, looking particularly
at how the relationship between them has been construed in the theology of Karl
Barth, the Barmen Declaration and the Belhar Confession. It concludes that a
relationship between confession and politics is unavoidable, yet this relationship
is only best comprehended when one looks at it in a confessional manner.
A ‘confessional manner’ of reading Karl Barth’s theology is explained.
Issues such as the primacy of the Word of God, the church as the subject of
theology, the public witness of Christ to the world, the political context in which
this theology takes place, as well as the ethical implications which emanates from
this theology characterises confessional theology.
The usage of the concept “confession” is informed by Barth’s observation
that as Christians we are obliged to speak about God, but we are human beings
and therefore cannot speak about God in an manner that suggest that God is
fully comprehensible. By confining itself not merely to his monumental work –
the Church Dogmatics – but also to Barth’s preceding and succeeding works, this
research is able to render a detailed illustration of how Barth viewed the
relationship of confessions to politics.
Chapter 1 establishes the confessional nature of his theology. This chapter
traces the most influential people and events that shaped the confessional nature
of Barth’s theology. These include Luther, Kant, the Blumhardts, as well as
Calvin and the Reformed theology in particular.
Chapter 2 investigates whether Barth was true to his 1925 understanding
of what constituted a Reformed confession when he was confronted with the
need to confess in 1934. The historicity of the Barmen Theological Declaration is explored to illustrate that Barth continued to view theology in a confessional
manner.
Chapter 3 deals with Barth’s Church Dogmatics, illustrating that Barth
never wanted his work to be seen as a complete event, but preferred to see it as a
process. It argues that contrary to the 1930s where Barth’s theology insisted on
the essence of confessional theology, the entire Church Dogmatics (especially the
parts that proceeds the era indicated) should be read as confessional theology.
Chapter 4 deals with the Belhar Confession that was adopted in South
African in 1986. Admitting that the Belhar Confession was influenced by the
theology of Barth, the characteristics of confessional theology are also explored in
this Confession. It is argued that many have failed to see the Belhar Confession’s
call for embodiment, because they have interpreted this Confession without
regard for the new church order.
Finally, it is argued that the confessional nature of Belhar allows this
Confession to contribute positively to the current democratic dispensation in
South Africa. It is admitted that the Belhar Confession is a confession of its time
and.
It is also argued that a confessional theology can be a suitable theological
alternative that can contribute to the current theological deliberations.
Additionally a confessional theology can provide a platform of discussing ways
in which theology and politics, which remain intertwined, can both exist side by
side, without the one dictating to the other.